You can just click the link and see the questions…
I think it branches, so you have to start answering the survey to see all the questions, but as long as you don’t submit you should be fine.
Wonder if we’ll ever get to see the results of the 2 surveys carried out earlier this year?
1 Like
Only if the results can be manufactured to make it look like everything is fluffy clouds in a powder blue sky and smelling of roses. Then they don’t have to do anything., other than head for the mess for a leisurely day.
Has anyone seen the results of these surveys, or does it need a FOI request?
It’d be interesting to see if the aerospace experience currently on offer, matches that which the cadets wanted it to be two and half years ago.
Don’t do an FOI. Write to the OC2FTS, which is what the commandant said to do when we have questions. Or raise it on Valuing our People teams site.
2 Likes
And don’t just ask for a copy your self, ask for it to be put on Sharepoint so we can all see it!
4 Likes
yes…
Someone in our Wing kept pushing it and shared it with me
The work using this information is still ongoing and will be for quite some time yet as the data gathered - as you have seen - is extensive. This means that I’m unable to give you a long list of all its specific outcomes at this point in time as they are nowhere near identified, actioned and finished but broadly they are as below:
- Continuation of 2FTS’ mentoring and development project to engage existing female staff; to support one another and grow number through making units more welcoming and providing strong role models. Aiming to increase retention, improve recruitment rates and thus encourage more women in aviation
- Demystify aviation, encourage, advertise and engage with cadets. Provide accessible and signposted sources of information to answer cadets questions about activities and reduce hesitancy to participate and apply.
- Provide face to face briefings and presentations to cadets where possible, or utilise tools such as Teams and Vimeo to provide information in a form cadets wish to engage with, using a range of staff and cadets representing different demographic groups.
- Educate staff to enable them to pass on accurate information about aerospace activities and opportunities to cadets to direct them to correct sources.
- Create common selection criteria for courses across regions which do not discriminate based on cadets access to experiences i.e. making exam grades a minimum requirement and not a competition factor
- Ensure scholarship information is broad, detailed and made available to cadets well ahead of when it is needed. This should include cost clarification, course content and impacts on work or school.
- Actively encourage all cadets to apply for courses if it is believed that they would be good candidates. Trying to mitigate cadets lack of confidence in their abilities from stopping them from applying independently.
- Encourage the better understanding of the roles of volunteer staff within 2 and 6FTS, and roles of visiting CCF and ATC staff at flying units.
- Engage in discussion with female CFAV’s and Staff Cadets from around the organisation, and at all levels, to ensure continual feedback and development.
- Focus on adapting flying and aerospace related units to be more female cadet and staff friendly; including adequate changing locations, access to toilets without embarrassment, reassurance and explanations of processes where necessary.
- Discussion with external organisations with experience of similar engagement programmes for both learning and partnership opportunities.
They became a bit of a thorn in the CoC side asking about it and were getting frustrated they kept being fobbed or or told to ask someone else…but what is above is what is they finally got back from an email in Oct22.
Now a full year on it would be interesting to know how far they have got with these aims, what progress has been made
1 Like
And then senior people in the org wonder why some CFAVs choose to do FOIs…
5 Likes
But have you seen the amount of stupid FIOs that have been submitted!!
1 Like
Yes, but if we could get answers by asking nicely then people wouldn’t need to resort to it.
Or even if the org was up front about stuff.
5 Likes
Even Central Government have figured this out and don’t try to bury bad news anymore.
i think this was the issue…they (my source) asked X months after the survey “any outcome” and was fobbed off.
tried again Y months later and just kept it up until they got the above.
why that list was able to be shared from a determined CFAV and not offered out via some annoucement i don’t understand but adds value to the organisation as we can see what came of the survey
1 Like
I’m aware of this one. It was a CFAV he was hassling instead of the CoC. He had been told to use the Wing and Region Aviation Officers who had the document rather than irritate a VGS CFAV Flt Lt who was trying to actually deliver things.
The Region CoC had the full details, that is who we’re meant to communicate it out. I imagine some didn’t want to as it wasn’t flattering in some cases from the data I saw.
A negative response from cadets in an aerospace ‘experience’ survey. And they didn’t see that coming 
Did any of them? Genuinely interested as it was a black hole where we are! I’ve still not seen it - flattering or unflattering. And given I know some of our cadets responded to it, it’d be interesting to see if their experiences matched others around the country!
Sounds like lots of people fobbing off the CFAV - which lead the CFAV to the door of survey’s Point of Contact!
As @JoeBloggs says, HQAC and AirCommand wonder why FOIs get submitted - yet here’s another example of lack of transparency THROUGHOUT the Chain of Command leading to extra work for CFAVs on the coal face.
Just so I’m clear, is this the same survey that said something like:
“if you have any questions or want further information please contact XXX (Flt Lt CFAV)”?
There have been so many surveys recently, with results withheld or brushed under the carpet I might be confusing it with another one!
Edited to add, I’m not trying to bait you, I am genuinely trying to work out which survey we mean!
1 Like
Just for clarity - I work with the named person on project work.
They were the contact for the survey when it was live. Actions and detailed analysis were for regions which was explained to the individual discussed above. He was instructed to go through his CoC and instead was repeatedly rather rude to the named Flt Lt which led to issues being raised to his CoC about his behaviour. There is asking questions and there is being obnoxious bordering on offensive because he’s not getting information from someone who doesn’t actually have it.
Hah! When I followed up on the ACPS “alternative” for those cadets ageing out, I got (more or less) the "why are you bothering me, there has been a solution" email back. Only problem was they hadn’t notified me of the solution being instigated - that I had suggested! 
So, good luck for an email out of the blue…
1 Like
Let’s not forget there were 2 surveys. The first one came out and they obviously weren’t happy with people’s responses because it was rewritten and reissued!
I wonder if the point of contact was the same person for both surveys, and, if the findings copied above were from the first or second survey?